Volvo Self Driving Car... Fail

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

I keep thinking of one aspect. What will happen to the big car manufacturers?

With driving cars, you would no longer need big engine options or things of that nature. Primary just comfort items would be options, such as leather vs cloth. This will no doubt remove the complexity of car manufacturing. Will style even matter at that point, if everyone is driving at the same pace like robots, with their head down in their tablet/book reader? So if cars turn more generic, will the industry be decimated?

I think (though I sure as hell don't know) that even self-driving cars will have different performance characteristics just like cars do now. Acceleration, for example - an expensive self-drive with a powerful engine will get you up to speed faster even if you aren't hitting the gas yourself. Nobody needs to go 0-60 in 4 seconds now, but they pay a premium for the "option" and more importantly for other people to see they can pay that premium. And no doubt they'll sell that kind of speed as some sort of "accident avoidance ability" or something.

Style and status will always matter too. A self-driving S500 will always be cooler than a self-driving Smart Car. And the gearheads are really going to lose their #### when someone converts a '69 Camaro into a self-driving car.

[Ashartus]

I think some of the biggest gains for self-driving cars will come when we get all the human drivers off the street. They could communicate with each other and presumably a city traffic system to optimize traffic flow; speed limits could also probably be increased due to computers responding more quickly and accurately than humans. As others have mentioned car ownership may also become unnecessary, not to mention giant parking lots around shopping centres, residential street parking, etc.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by polak

Computers are only better at avoiding accidents than we are if they're working.

I'll give you a million dollars if you can find me a computer that hasn't ever glitched or frozen.

You really want to take that bet?

The computers Nasa uses in their deep space probes, have been operational in some crafts for 35+ years without failure or malfunction. In some of the harshest conditions in the universe.

Also, you don't understand how self driving cars work. When it comes into mainstream, the cars will be connected via a network, so the car you are tailing at 180 KPH, will be linked to yours, and so on. So if one car has a failure, the surrounding cars will react at essentially light speed. It will be ridiculously safer, however, that being said, I am part of that 10% that is a driving enthusiast, and I hope this technology only becomes mainstream after I die, or at least am no longer physically fit to drive. And to me that is going to be the biggest benefit. It will liberate many seniors immensely. This is the type of purchase I could see making for my parents one day if they are too old and frail to drive themselves.

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Over a million miles driven, I think 12 accidents.

Headline: Google's Self Driving Car accident prone

I realize that they'll improve the technology, but, at this point, isn't that accurate? If I knew someone who averaged more than one accident per 100,000 miles driven, I'd consider them to be a fairly awful driver.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by gargamel

I realize that they'll improve the technology, but, at this point, isn't that accurate? If I knew someone who averaged more than one accident per 100,000 miles driven, I'd consider them to be a fairly awful driver.

Wikipedia says 11, of which, Google claims that none are the fault of the auto driving system. Either the vehicle was rear ended while stopped (or something similar) or the vehicle was being driven manually at the time.

[Flacker]

Originally Posted by pylon

You really want to take that bet?

The computers Nasa uses in their deep space probes, have been operational in some crafts for 35+ years without failure or malfunction. In some of the harshest conditions in the universe.

...

You don't even have to go to NASA. I have had Cisco UCS Blades that have run from the day they were commissioned, until they day they were replaced with updated hardware. Redundancy in easily achieved.

Polak is going to be busted, if too many take him up on his wager.

The fact that the automobile industry don't have the equivalent of aviation's TCAS or marine AIS (collision avoidance systems) already has been a function of cost. The technology is getting cheaper, so I'd guess it is only a matter of time.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Flacker

You don't even have to go to NASA. I have had Cisco UCS Blades that have run from the day they were commissioned, until they day they were replaced with updated hardware. Redundancy in easily achieved.

Polak is going to be busted, if too many take him up on his wager.

The fact that the automobile industry don't have the equivalent of aviation's TCAS or marine AIS (collision avoidance systems) already has been a function of cost. The technology is getting cheaper, so I'd guess it is only a matter of time.

And all of that is irrelevant if we're comparing to humans to computers anyways. Humans are far more error prone. Sure some computers screw up. People do way more anyhow

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

For people who like to drive, do you like driving in traffic or just like being behind the wheel?

Why not just drive on a racing track if you want to 'drive'?

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, it's just the overall experience of driving, having full control of the car, and feeling the differences in different cars. I also like to drive myself to destinations, and not just drive in a circle on a track.

Can't explain it, but I don't see any difference between liking to drive vs. liking to ride a bike. Would people be ok with self moving bikes, just so we can get rid of all the dumb cyclists out there? If you want exercise, why not ride the bike at a gym, or ride it around in a track?

[jeffman]

Originally Posted by codynw

People should just learn to drive.

Yea ##### blind people who want a way to travel independently

[GGG]

Originally Posted by AcGold;5312947[B

]I don't like putting my own safety in someone elses hands.[/B] I like driving because I've never been in an accident and been in 3 when other people are driving. Not putting my life in the hands of a computer when I have never even come close to being in an accident.

The whole thing would fall apart in winter anyways, auto driving cars on ice introduces unpredictable factors that would nearly guarantee issues. Imagine if nobody knows how to drive and there's a flash freeze. Good luck getting to work.

This is funny

Everytime you get in a car you assume that the other people driving aren't going to kill you. You can be as good and as defensive driver as you want and when you stop at a red light a guy in a jacked truck can plow through you from behind.

So getting into a car puts your life into the hands of others. I will take putting into the hands of a machine instead.

Also people afe pretty terrible to at navigating safely through blizzards and ice. Multi hour commutes and a thousand accidents is what we get in a blizzard. I'm willing to let the computers try to do better because we really suck at driving.

Auto drive cars probably add a year to life expectancy (guess)

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Regorium

I'll give you a billion dollars if you can find me a human that has never made a mistake.

A newborn baby.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

What will you do when you fail the test?

Would use my motorcycle way more often.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

To be clear, according to Volvo this isn't a self-driving car.

This is a car that some idiots thought had a pedestrian detection feature, which is an optional safety feature Volvo offers in its cars. The car is NOT a self driving car. It looks like the driver was trying to show off a feature the car never had to these people by driving the car directly at them.

The pedestrian detection feature is a safety feature that removes human reaction time out of stopping the car if a pedestrian/another car/etc were to suddenly appear in front of the car. It is not intended to be used as a feature that allows you to pay less attention on the road or self drives the car.

Volvo is developing what they call an crash free car but it also isn't driverless. It will be a combo of the current systems, road edge warnings/corrections, keep track of all cars and things around the car, adaptive cruise control, vehicle to vehicle communication etc. Essentially all the things that in current cars in bits and pieces but as part of one entire system. It is expected to be on the roads around 2020.

And you are correct. The detection system is not intended for the driver to be able to drive more distracted than we already are. It's an attempt to take a good chunk the inevitable human error out of things (driver and pedestrian/cyclist) and to take the reaction time out of things. Note that the current detection system only works at town road speed as well (below 30 mph). It isn't going to do anything for you if something large enough jumps out at you while you are going 70 mph. At least not in current models.

And as my post a couple pages back said....it works. And works well.

[rohara66]

Originally Posted by jeffman

Yea ##### blind people who want a way to travel independently

Just so everyone's on the same page.... we're designing self driving cars for blind people?

Hah!

I agree with the OP you quoted, people should learn how to drive better.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by rohara66

Just so everyone's on the same page.... we're designing self driving cars for blind people?

Hah!

I agree with the OP you quoted, people should learn how to drive better.

Yes they are. What's funny about that?

[burn_this_city]

I still think we're further away from fully autonomous cars than the tech companies are saying. My car has collision avoidance sensors for both pedestrians and cars. It stops working when the car is dirty, which is pretty common here in the winter. Its one thing to drive these cars in California where its sunny and nice all the time vs the real world conditions in a lot of places. Snow, heavy rain, and mucky conditions blind critical sensors.

I would support mandatory self driving mode during bumper to bumper traffic to speed up efficiency, but I hate the idea during less busy times or cruising on the highway.

[Flash Walken]

So this has gone from a thread illustrating the faults of driverless technology to providing irrefutable evidence towards the faults of human drivers.

Maybe time for a thread title change, "Idiot motorist is an idiot, injures pedestrian."

[polak]

Originally Posted by pylon

You really want to take that bet?

The computers Nasa uses in their deep space probes, have been operational in some crafts for 35+ years without failure or malfunction. In some of the harshest conditions in the universe.

Also, you don't understand how self driving cars work. When it comes into mainstream, the cars will be connected via a network, so the car you are tailing at 180 KPH, will be linked to yours, and so on. So if one car has a failure, the surrounding cars will react at essentially light speed. It will be ridiculously safer, however, that being said, I am part of that 10% that is a driving enthusiast, and I hope this technology only becomes mainstream after I die, or at least am no longer physically fit to drive. And to me that is going to be the biggest benefit. It will liberate many seniors immensely. This is the type of purchase I could see making for my parents one day if they are too old and frail to drive themselves.

These computers in cars will be exposed to a lot bumps and bruises though. Our roads are still pretty crappy even in the city, let alone rural gravel roads. That and they have to be affordable. I have my doubts that they'll be nearly as reliable as you think. Even if the computers are extremely reliable, there is no saying that the sensors they rely on will be. Hell, every car has a stupid sensor issue at least a handful of times in its life.

The network solution you suggest relies on every car being self-driven... How do you make that switch happen all at once?

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, it's just the overall experience of driving, having full control of the car, and feeling the differences in different cars. I also like to drive myself to destinations, and not just drive in a circle on a track.

Can't explain it, but I don't see any difference between liking to drive vs. liking to ride a bike. Would people be ok with self moving bikes, just so we can get rid of all the dumb cyclists out there? If you want exercise, why not ride the bike at a gym, or ride it around in a track?

Yeah it's a very hard thing to put your finger on. I think it's just being in control of a machine that is capable of doing some pretty awesome stuff. This is further backed up when you consider my enjoyment of driving is dramatically reduced in an automatic.

I'll also admit, most people who claim to enjoy driving probably don't drive like the most law abiding citizens. You can have a lot of fun when no one is looking.

[GP_Matt]

Any guess about how long before a self driving car gets into NASCAR or F1?
It will most likely be just like when Deep Blue beat Kasparov or Watson beat Ken Jennings.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by polak

These computers in cars will be exposed to a lot bumps and bruises though. Our roads are still pretty crappy even in the city, let alone rural gravel roads. That and they have to be affordable. I have my doubts that they'll be nearly as reliable as you think. Even if the computers are extremely reliable, there is no saying that the sensors it relies on will be. Hell, every car has a stupid sensor issue at least a handful of times in its life.

If the only cars on the road are driverless, they will compensate for the one computer that may have a malfunction.

It's the same concept behind herd immunization.

Honestly, bumpy roads? Do you think Taber is more or less of a bumpy drive than this?: